ABSTRACT
Background
Physiotherapists assess lifestyle factors, including sleep health, that contribute to poor health outcomes. Recommendations of sleep screening assessments have been provided; however, physical therapists’ ability to successfully identify which patients would benefit from additional consultation has not been established.
Objective
To determine if physiotherapists can accurately apply an evidence-based sleep decision tree to four hypothetical standardized patient cases.
Methods
Participants applied the sleep decision tree to the four standardized cases via an online platform. Likert scales were used to assess perception of ease of use, likelihood of use, and how helpful they thought the sleep decision tree would be. Descriptive analyses and multiple linear regression models were conducted.
Results
Eighty-eight individuals participated in the study. Most participants correctly answered the cases with 1 and 3 decision points (92% and 84%, respectively). In contrast, few participants correctly answered the cases with 4 and 5 decision points (7% and 14%, respectively). Seventy-four (84%) respondents indicated the sleep decision tree was easy to use; 57 (65%) answered they were likely to use the sleep decision tree in clinical practice; and 66 (75%) said the sleep decision tree would be helpful to their clients.
Conclusions
Physiotherapists were able to accurately apply a sleep decision tree to simpler patient cases but were frequently unable to apply it to more complex patient cases. This may be due to lack of education, perceived ease of using, and relevance of the sleep decision tree to their clinical practice. The sleep decision tree may aid physiotherapists in assessing sleep health, screening for sleep disturbances, and referring for further assessment.
Acknowlegements
We would like to acknowledge Stacia Troshynski Brown, Alexandra Bea, Michelle Drerup, and Suzanne Stevens for their contribution to reviewing and providing feedback on the cases.
Declaration of Interest
CS is owner and CEO of Sleep Health Education, LLC. The other authors declare no conflict of interest.